Text Size

Condoleezza Rice's replacement may have been picked, and it is unclear if Robert Gates will still have a spot in the Cabinet.
AP Photo

And nearly always those appointed have either been on the outs with their own party or tapped for second-tier posts.

The current President Bush, for example, had a longtime Democratic member of Congress, Norman Mineta, serve in his Cabinet — but as a rarely seen transportation secretary.

Cohen, likewise, came from the moderate wing of his party and differed little from Clinton’s centrist national security instincts.

Jimmy Carter invited James R. Schlesinger, a former Cabinet secretary in the Nixon and Ford administrations, to serve as his secretary of energy. But Schlesinger’s departure from the Ford White House was so acrimonious that his walk across the aisle was a pretty short one. The same was true of Democratic Texas Gov. John Connally, who became Nixon’s treasury secretary as he grew estranged from an increasingly liberal party that he would abandon two years after entering a GOP administration.

More notable examples of recruiting from the opposition came under John F. Kennedy, who put Republicans C. Douglas Dillon and Robert McNamara in charge of the Treasury Department and the Pentagon, respectively.

Beschloss noted that Kennedy also considered holding over a Republican named Gates at the Defense Department.

Thomas S. Gates Jr. served as President Dwight Eisenhower’s last defense secretary, and the young president-elect from Massachusetts thought that at a time of security tensions, keeping a familiar figure at the Pentagon might be reassuring — and perhaps would take thepolitical heat off him from congressional Republicans.

The idea was to install Robert F. Kennedy as Gates’ deputy and train him to take the top slot after a year. But Joseph P. Kennedy, the president’s father, wanted RFK as attorney general, and some Pennsylvania Democrats thought Gates was eying a statewide run as a Republican in his native state.

Political observers differ on just how important it is for Obama to have voices from the opposite party in his Cabinet.

“Any Cabinet secretary, regardless of party, will be expected to carry out the new president's agenda,” said Bartlett. “Diverse points of view can be found in many places. It doesn't necessarily make sense that it come from your Cabinet.”

And Beschloss noted that some attempts to include members of the opposite party have proved laughable, pointing in particular to Martin Durkin, the Democratic plumber who served as Eisenhower’s labor secretary for less than eight months in a Cabinet that became known as "Nine Millionaires and a Plumber.”

But some believe that is politically essential for Obama to practice the post-partisanship he preached during the campaign.

“The country will be better off (and so will this administration) if we return to the tradition that politics stops at the water's edge,” said a senior official in the Clinton White House. “That's why Clinton chose Bill Cohen. Obama inherits two wars and a country that is deeply divided over them. When you look at all that his administration needs to get done on foreign policy, from Iraq to Iran to climate change, partisanship can only get in the way.”

And, this prominent Democrat said, now is a rare moment when Obama may be able to do what many of his predecessors tried and failed to accomplish.

“A post-partisan politics was the central promise of the Obama campaign — one that the rest of Washington will try to break and only a president can force them to keep. The American people desperately want Washington to move beyond the partisan rancor. That's easy to do in the midst of a honeymoon and in the middle of a crisis, but it will get harder in the heat of legislative battle. Because of his temperament, his majority, and his opponents' disarray, Obama is in an ideal position to change the tone in Washington.”

Steven Schier, a professor at Minnesota’s Carleton College, said keeping Gates at the Pentagon would allow Obama the political room to indulge in tokenism elsewhere.

With Gates, he said, “he can probably get away with a Republican in a second-tier Cabinet appointment.”

If Obama comes to regret his loud promises of bipartisan Cabinet appointees, this, too, would be following a familiar path.

Beschloss recalled an infamous declaration from another political insurgent who took on the party establishment and promised to bring sweeping change to Washington.

"If, after the inauguration, you find a Cy Vance as secretary of state and Zbigniew Brzezinski as head of national security, then I would say we failed,” said Hamilton Jordan, Jimmy Carter’s campaign manager, in 1976. “And I'd quit. But that’s not going to happen. You’re going to see new faces, new ideas.”

Vance became Carter’s secretary of state and Brezinski his national security adviser.

GET REAL! You really think O is going to appoint Republicans to top posts? Maybe a RINO like Chuck Hagel...how about Lincoln Chaffee, the poster child for RINOs? How about my one and only Mel Martinez, the ultimate RINO? These people have no interest other than cementing their power for the next 50 years. Americans are so dumbed down that it is going to happen. HOPE...CHANGE...I JUST HOPE I HAVE SOME CHANGE AT THE END OF THIS.

?The country will be better off (and so will this administration) if we return to the tradition that politics stops at the water's edge,? said a senior official in the Clinton White House. ?That's why Clinton chose Bill Cohen. Obama inherits two wars and a country that is deeply divided over them. When you look at all that his administration needs to get done on foreign policy, from Iraq to Iran to climate change, partisanship can only get in the way.? For 8 years democrats have done all they could to derail the current administration and policies, including traveling overseas and acting in seditious ways.

Uh huh! Who is this new President elect? When and how long will it take for the public to know exactly the actual planned (Obama's agenda) results of the four year contract they signed and sealed on November 4th?

What of all this campaign babble of a new (change) by-partisan middle of the road Obama Administration. Now I ask you, why on earth a life long extremely liberal, to the point of communist ideology in his past writings and favored political authors and then add his political affiliation going all the way back to his parents and grand parents who were communist leaning as well. both black and white, what are we now suppose to believe after a two year campaign of HOPE and CHANGE...the only change he has come up with after the election is the fact that he is no longer an extreme left winger but, has repented and now is a centrist?

Peer's to me Obama is conflicted and confused or he's a habitual liar that talks in layer's of psycho babble that not even the smartest of the smart can really understand, but assumes that what he is saying is wonderful and ground breaking. Put’s me in mind of Ozzie Osborne, who is probably just about on the same level of intelligence as Obama. Geez...makes GWB look like a candidate for MENSA.

Bill Clinton and Hillary have pulled together all their old loyal staff members and stacked the new cabinet key positions...Hillary the new SOS...Bwaaahahaha how much funnier can this get...or maybe how big a disaster will this breed.

In a recent column, George Will, the conservative voice called by many as pragmatic and smart, advocated bankruptcy for the 3 US auto makers saying this:all

“Do nothing that will delay bankrupt companies from filing for bankruptcy protection, so that improvident labor contracts can be unraveled , allowing the companies to try to devise plausible business models. Instead, advocates of a rescue propose extending to Detroit the government’s business model for the nation – redistributing wealth from the successful to the failed, an implausible formula for prosperity”.

This from the man who consistently touts free market ideals: Bankruptcy.

If the free market reigned there would BE no bankruptcy. It seems the right is perfectly happy with bankruptcy for corporations, but they want to make it mighty hard for the average Joe or Jane to claim bankruptcy, and even then they’ll call them all kinds of disparaging names.

But, let’s stick to the big 3 and their labor problems, which George Will chooses to point out as being their most onerous. I’d like to look at things from Joe and Jane’s point of view for a moment.

Let's say I’m Joe, the GM factory worker.

I’m a very successful line operator. My business model is one where I offered my services, promised to show up everyday sober and on time, and then work as hard and efficiently as possible without causing problems. For this, my associate in business promised to pay me a certain amount of money for my services.

I’ve consistently performed my work just as contracted.

This business model has been very successful for me for many years. It was likewise a very successful business model for my father and my grandfather.

The trouble is my associate in business was NOT successful. Their business model failed utterly.

I was successful. The big 3 failed, as pointed out.

So, now, George Will wants to - through government bankruptcy - redistribute my wealth to the failed Big 3 by declaring the promises the failed Big 3 made to successful me null and void (“unravel” improvident labor contracts).

Do you see why George Will is constantly and accurately accused of eristic sophistry?

Haven't we heard enough from the Republicans for the last 8 years? Aren't things bad enough already? Or do we want more?

Yes we have, and so fiscal conservatives like myself want no republicans near decision making for the next 2 years. This economic storm has been brewing for 25 years, living on credit and losing our manufacturing base overseas. Sadly, the democrat solution is one that fails every time, spend, spend, spend, sound familiar? Republicans tried it and look what that got us. Our deficits, money supply issues, and overall unscrupulous policy of treasury is undermining our country. The bailouts were a bad idea on principle alone, let alone fiscal soundness. So here we are, Pres. Elect Obama and the democrats have promised solutions to all of our problems, the same government that creates all the problems! LOL! Hold on to your hat citizens, until we learn some fiscal restraint, its gonna get alot worse from here........................

This is one of those ridiculous posts that perpetuates hyper-partisanship. We saw from the last days of the election that there are many highly competent men and women like Powell, Brooks, Duberstein, Will, and Noonan, Republicans who put country over partisanship. The party designation is going to mean less as radicals like Gingrich and Rove fade away, champions of intellectual loyalty oaths. The Obama team is a group of patriots, not incompetent, far right, religious fundamentalists who know nothing about running government.

Yes we have, and so fiscal conservatives like myself want no republicans near decision making for the next 2 years. This economic storm has been brewing for 25 years, living on credit and losing our manufacturing base overseas. Sadly, the democrat solution is one that fails every time, spend, spend, spend, sound familiar? Republicans tried it and look what that got us. Our deficits, money supply issues, and overall unscrupulous policy of treasury is undermining our country. The bailouts were a bad idea on principle alone, let alone fiscal soundness. So here we are, Pres. Elect Obama and the democrats have promised solutions to all of our problems, the same government that creates all the problems! LOL! Hold on to your hat citizens, until we learn some fiscal restraint, its gonna get alot worse from here........................

Hello friend,

all

I understand what you say, but I take a different view.

I’m constantly searching for conservative Republicans who can help. I know they are there, and I know their ideas are there. I’ve encountered many, like yourself, who state their views passionately, but with respect -- and in the honest desire to affect positive results.

This is one of those ridiculous posts that perpetuates hyper-partisanship. We saw from the last days of the election that there are many highly competent men and women like Powell, Brooks, Duberstein, Will, and Noonan, Republicans who put country over partisanship. The party designation is going to mean less as radicals like Gingrich and Rove fade away, champions of intellectual loyalty oaths. The Obama team is a group of patriots, not incompetent, far right, religious fundamentalists who know nothing about running government.

Isn't he the same radical who along with Pres. Clinton presided over a budget surplus and actually balanced the budget? You RUBE! Don't let your own religious bigotry blind your common sense button....LOL!

I’m constantly searching for conservative Republicans who can help. I know they are there, and I know their ideas are there. I’ve encountered many, like yourself, who state their views passionately, but with respect -- and in the honest desire to affect positive results.

I suspect Obama is conducting a similar search.

With his resources, he’d better find some.

Well, I'm going to agree to disagree on this one, for Sen. Obama in his heart of hearts won't seek any true fiscal conservatives because its a polar opposite to his leanings. He thinks(wrongly so IMHO) that the government is the solution to problems where fiscal conservatives think they(government) are the creation of said problems. The perfect storm has already been set in motion and it will eventually lead to a group of like minded(Ron Paul types) limited government congressman to lead us out of the behemoth that has become Washington. States rights might become more prevelant in the years to come and Washington continues to wield more and more power over our daily lives, many among us just want to pay our taxes(reasonable amount) and be left to our own devices to succeed in this country. For I believe that most folks don't need a handout from DC in order to be successful. When more want something for nothing is when the real trouble begins. Heaven help us if we're there..........

Why is this question even being asked?! Obama is going to actually appoint a Republican to a top power position in his administration? That's laughable. That's ridiculous. Last time I checked, Obama was considered The Most Liberal Senator in D.C. Wow, Repubs are desperate for a seat at the table. Look, he may be bipartisan in discussing openly the plans he has in mind during his term. But make no mistake about it, it's going to be Democratic rule, baby. He has no reason to bring in these bumpkin Republicans to screw up some more stuff.

Why is this question even being asked?! Obama is going to actually appoint a Republican to a top power position in his administration? That's laughable. That's ridiculous. Last time I checked, Obama was considered The Most Liberal Senator in D.C. Wow, Repubs are desperate for a seat at the table. Look, he may be bipartisan in discussing openly the plans he has in mind during his term. But make no mistake about it, it's going to be Democratic rule, baby. He has no reason to bring in these bumpkin Republicans to screw up some more stuff. And with the Senate supermajority for the Dems a distinct possibility, who cares what they think. By the way, McCain would be a good pick. He's not really a Republican anyway.

Yes we have, and so fiscal conservatives like myself want no republicans near decision making for the next 2 years. This economic storm has been brewing for 25 years, living on credit and losing our manufacturing base overseas. Sadly, the democrat solution is one that fails every time, spend, spend, spend, sound familiar? Republicans tried it and look what that got us. Our deficits, money supply issues, and overall unscrupulous policy of treasury is undermining our country. The bailouts were a bad idea on principle alone, let alone fiscal soundness. So here we are, Pres. Elect Obama and the democrats have promised solutions to all of our problems, the same government that creates all the problems! LOL! Hold on to your hat citizens, until we learn some fiscal restraint, its gonna get alot worse from here...

What a ridiculous post. When was the last time Republicans spent, spent, spent on something useful for We, the People? Look at where your precious money went, dude: Big Pharma, Big Oil and the military-industrial complex. Government only creates problems if you want it to. I'd say we've seen that in the last eight years: a Texas village idiot dismantling the public sector on purpose. You're just like the rest of the 'conservative losers: We, the People gave Obama a mandate to bring this country into the 21st century, and it's gonna take an awful lot of money to do that, and you and your imbecilic brethren don't realize what hit you. No more Terri Sciavos and Katrinas and Iraqs and secret energy policy meetings and outings of CIA agents and vetoing S-CHIP and stem cell research. Against the bailout? What would you do differently if you see the financial system as we know it collapsing before our very eyes? Push the entire country over the edge? Give me a break.

Well, I'm going to agree to disagree on this one, for Sen. Obama in his heart of hearts won't seek any true fiscal conservatives because its a polar opposite to his leanings. He thinks(wrongly so IMHO) that the government is the solution to problems where fiscal conservatives think they(government) are the creation of said problems. The perfect storm has already been set in motion and it will eventually lead to a group of like minded(Ron Paul types) limited government congressman to lead us out of the behemoth that has become Washington. States rights might become more prevelant in the years to come and Washington continues to wield more and more power over our daily lives, many among us just want to pay our taxes(reasonable amount) and be left to our own devices to succeed in this country. For I believe that most folks don't need a handout from DC in order to be successful. When more want something for nothing is when the real trouble begins. Heaven help us if we're there..........

There are indeed many reasons to feel pessimistic about the future. We’re in a bad state right now, and it will take lots of hard work to get us back on an even keel.all

But, I have a great deal of faith in the strength and ingenuity of the American people. I know we’ve been through hard times before and come out on top, and I believe we’ll do it again.

My reading of history tells me that in our best times we’ve seen a true leader in the White House.

Simply put, I believe we’re about to enter into another of those times. I’m aware that many disagree with me, and they want me to remember that we’ve been fooled before, and recently so.

Geithner is a Republican. People forget that. That means possibly 2 of the big 4 -- with Gates at Defense -- went to Republicans. . Why all the pressure for Dems to put in Repubs when Bush didn't even come close nor was he pressured to? In fact, Bush installed far right lackeys in almost all post with no pushback by the MSM. And look where that got us? If Obama wanted to keep all his Cabinet posts Dem, that's his right. To the victor go the spoils.